How U.S. Industries View Landmark Trade Accord : Economy: In theory, the changes should open up many Japanese markets for the first time. But skeptics say it will be a long time, if ever, before positive results are seen.

The new trade accord announced Thursday is a landmark move to reduce the $49-billion U.S. trade deficit with Japan.

Or it’s not. It depends on whom you ask:

* “I think this accord will make a difference and continue what has already been a process of Japanese liberalization,” said William Cline, a senior fellow at the Institute for International Economics in Washington. “I think it could have a measurable impact.”

* “I think it’s much ado about not very much,” said Clyde V. Prestowitz Jr., president of the Economic Strategy Institute and a former trade official with the Commerce Department. “It won’t have a very big effect on the trade deficit or remove the causes of trade friction.”

One thing observers do agree on: Whatever happens will take a lot of time.

In general, the new accord would result in structural changes to the Japanese economy that in theory would make it easier for all American businesses to set up shop in Japan and would increase U.S. industry’s competitiveness at home. Through a variety of measures, the accord would also improve the market in Japan for imported goods.

To be fully implemented, the accord will require governments in both Japan and the United States to pass new laws. In addition, the accord is vague on significant details--such as the degree to which the Japanese will increase spending on public works--details that would have to be worked out later.

If implemented, the accord could benefit specific industries. Large retailers eyeing Japanese markets could gain from the removal of impediments in Japan’s goods-distribution network, which now compels an outsider to run a gauntlet of regulations and entrenched business practices.

Construction firms and makers of heavy equipment could find new Japanese customers under the promise by Japan to increase spending on public works such as roads, bridges and waterways.

In some areas, the accord does not go far enough, critics charge.

For example, the Japanese promise more disclosure of the workings of the so-called keiretsu, the close-knit business groups under which preferential business arrangements are conducted and outsiders are locked out. But observers like Prestowitz favor abolishing the keiretsu .

In any case, it’s unlikely that the accord will result in real improvement in the trade situation in the short term, economists say. A big obstacle is the strengthening dollar, which makes U.S. products less competitive on the world market.

Here is a sampling of reaction from various industries affected by the new pact:

Technology

Japan has pledged over the next five years to virtually cut in half the amount of time foreign companies must wait to obtain patents on their technology and inventions. According to the U.S. trade representative’s office, Japan has agreed to take no longer than 18 months to evaluate an application. The process now takes about 37 months.

Patent protection for U.S. inventions has long been a sore point among technology companies. Perhaps the most stunning example involves Texas Instruments, whose scientists in the late 1950s invented the integrated circuit--an all-important component of any electronic device. Texas Instruments was awarded a patent in Japan for its work last October, nearly 30 years after applying for it.

The new agreement notes that the Japanese have already agreed to add about 60 patent examiners to their staff and are seeking revisions in patent laws to permit computerized patent filing.

A separate agreement, tentatively approved late last month, opens opportunities for U.S. supercomputer makers to sell to the Japanese government, an estimated $130-million-a-year market that has so far proven impenetrable to U.S. companies.

Analysts said Cray Research, the Minneapolis company that is the largest U.S. supercomputer maker, stands to reap immediate benefits from the new agreement. But they noted that over time, smaller concerns could be winners as well.

Construction

Fluor Corp. has operated a procurement office in Japan for 25 years to buy Japanese materials for construction projects around the Pacific Rim. But the Irvine-based company’s year-old Fluor Daniel (Japan) has yet to sell anything.

“So we consider it a positive step,” said spokeswoman Deborah Land. “We’re ready when they are.” Fluor, with a license to build and a Japanese partner, now only lacks a contract.

Pasadena-based Parsons Corp., another engineering giant, similarly is “ready to go when they are,” said Leonard Pieroni, executive vice president.

Parsons too holds a construction license and has a Japanese partner. But, Pieroni acknowledged, progress in trade relations so far has come about only by Washington’s exerting pressure in the form of trade sanctions.

The experiences of Fluor and Parsons reflect those of the nation’s design and construction industry, said Mark G. Chalpin, spokesman for the International Engineering and Construction Industries Council. It will take strict enforcement and not just new rules to change collusive practices that so far have all but excluded foreign firms from winning major public and private construction contracts in Japan, Chalpin said.

“It’s really sad how often Americans buy off on (the notion) that an agreement makes a change,” he said. The proof that change has taken place “will be in the cash register ringing.”

Heavy Industry

Officials of heavy industry, including makers of steel, machine tools, construction equipment and cars, reserved opinion on whether Thursday’s U.S.-Japan trade accord would mean much change.

Industries such as steel, cars and machine tools have been battered by a flood of Japanese imports into the United States.

“We don’t see this having any significant beneficial effect on our industry,” said William Buchholz, chief financial officer with Cincinnati Milacron, a maker of machine tools and industrial robots.

“We’re glad to see movement in these problem areas,” added Tim Elder, manager of governmental affairs for Caterpillar Inc., the Peoria, Ill.,-based maker of construction equipment.

Anything that removes barriers to the importation of U.S. agricultural products would also stimulate the farm implement manufacturing business at home, said Emmett Barker, a spokesman for the Equipment Manufacturers Institute, a trade group.

Investment Banks

The agreement is supposed to make it easier for foreign firms to buy part or all of Japanese companies and to open factories in Japan.

Some U.S. investors and investment banks said Friday that the treaty’s provisions appeared promising but were skeptical that such changes would do much to lift key barriers to U.S. investment in Japan, which include credit and stock market conditions and the interlocking shareholdings between Japanese firms.

American firms see little incentive to buy stakes in Japanese firms when Japanese shares are still so high-priced compared to U.S. shares and when American firms’ borrowing costs are so much higher. Indeed, they noted that while few U.S. firms are buying into Japanese companies, some U.S. firms, such as Avon Products and Chrysler, have recently been selling off Japanese holdings to cash in on their lofty values.

“I don’t think you’re going to see a flood” of new investment there, said Michael Tennenbaum, vice-chairman of investment banking at Bear, Stearns & Co. in Los Angeles.

“To think any single agreement between the governments can really change the balance of investments is preposterous,” said Irwin L. Jacobs, the corporate raider and chief executive of Minstar Inc., in Minneapolis.

Texas investor T. Boone Pickens Jr. bought a 26% share of auto parts maker Koito Manufacturing, but has had to battle shareholders who are members of Koito’s cartel, or keiretsu , to get a seat on its board. “Changes in the government rules wouldn’t matter; the government wasn’t the problem,” said Mark Helmke, a Pickens spokesman.

Agriculture

They aren’t breaking out the champagne yet, but California wine makers are encouraged by the trade agreement with Japan and believe that it could help their premium wines flow even faster into the thirsty Asian market.

Japan already buys more American wines than any other foreign country--$25 million worth in 1989. An estimated 90% of all wines exported from the United States come from California wineries.

“The most important area in the agreement is the easing of the stringent distribution system, making it easier for larger retailers to import wine,” said Sam Folsom, spokesman for the Wine Institute, a trade organization representing California wineries.

Rice growers are just as enthusiastic, but probably for less reason. The easing of Japan’s complex distribution system would indeed be helpful in getting products such as rice out to the retailers. The only problem is that foreign rice is banned from Japanese soil.

Last April, in a separate initiative, the Administration singled out three narrow trade disputes with the Japanese for negotiation and possible retaliation. One involved agriculture--specifically wood products.

Although the other two--satellites and supercomputers--have since been addressed, no progress was made regarding wood. But discussions are ongoing. And Steve Lovett, director of the National Forest Products Assn., will be in Japan on Monday and Tuesday to assist in the negotiations, according to a spokeswoman from the Washington-based trade group.

Shippers

For shippers and exporters, the new U.S.-Japan agreement provides for expedited clearance procedures so that U.S. goods clear Japanese customs within 24 hours of their arrival in Japan.

Federal Express, which has been seeking faster customs clearances and expanded facilities at Narita Airport, may benefit from the change. It takes the Memphis company 48 hours to make what are supposed to be overnight deliveries to Osaka and Tokyo because it must unload packages at Narita, where they arrive, and transport them to a customs clearance center at Baraki Airport 40 miles away.

Expedited customs clearances may help perishables, apparel and some high-technology products, but it will make little difference for other merchandise. “We don’t get held up a lot. We don’t hear it a lot from our clients. We hear of problems in Southeast Asia,” said Charles H. Nevil of the Meridian Group, an international business management company in Los Angeles.

Retailing

Toys R Us, the biggest toy seller in the United States, expressed hope that the trade agreement would clear the way for the company to realize its longtime goal of entering Japan and becoming a major retailer in that market.

Robert C. Nakasone, vice chairman and president of Toys R Us, said the company has been interested in opening one of its warehouse-size stores in Japan ever since it created its international division in 1984. Concerned about trade barriers, however, Toys R Us went to other foreign markets instead, including Singapore, Hong Kong, Canada and Europe.

But last spring, encouraged by a recommendation by Japan’s Ministry of International Trade and Industry to ease trade barriers for big retailers, Toys R Us began scouting for four to six sites for a first round of stores in Japan. So far, it has applied with a partner to open a single store in Niigata in northern Japan.

Nakasone said the entrance of Toys R Us into Japan would benefit U.S. toy manufacturers, both because they would sell more of their goods through the company’s stores and because competing toy retailers also would want more U.S. products.

Still, Toys R Us officials aren’t ready to declare that the struggle to open for business in Japan is over. “When our store opens, we’ll be ecstatic,” Nakasone said. “But until that time comes, to be anything more than cautiously optimistic is a bit naive.”

Consumer Goods

The Japanese trade concessions might not have an immediate impact on American food makers and manufacturers of personal care and household consumer products.

In fact, many of these firms say the provisions covering exports will not help much since most of the products they sell in Japan are made in that nation. “The products that we sell in Japan are manufactured there and are not exported from the U.S.,” said a spokesman for Johnson & Johnson.

Consultant Gordon Wade noted that Procter & Gamble--whose Pampers disposable diapers and Cheers detergent are leading brands in Japan--has a major Japanese subsidiary making its products.

Kraft General Foods has numerous joint ventures in Japan, but the trade concessions will not have “a very significant impact at this time,” said spokeswoman Kathy Knuth. “Over a period of time, however, it could be beneficial.”

Contributing to this story were Times staff writers Patrick Lee, Paul Richter, Carla Lazzareschi, Ralph Vartabedian, Maria L. La Ganga, Nancy Yoshihara, Bruce Keppel, Jesus Sanchez and Stu Silverstein.